For whatever reason, The Letter is not dated, so we don’t know. But maybe Satpal Sidhu, the suddenly besieged Whatcom County Executive, wrote that fawning missive, extolling the virtues of his outgoing, scandal-ridden Public Works director, at the end of a very long work day.
Or week. Or month. Year?
You like to think so, given the import now attached to The Letter, which in the minds of some local progressives surely elevates Sidhu from the category of bureaucratic bungler — one who, notably, has accepted responsibility over the Jon Hutchings matter, and ostensibly taken steps to reduce the chance of future improper behavior — to embarrassing enabler.
This “letter of introduction” is really a gratuitous recommendation, co-signed by Tyler Schroeder, Sidhu’s deputy executive, now notably bound for a major leadership role at the Port of Bellingham’s Regional Economic Partnership.
In it, Sidhu extolls the workplace virtues of Hutchings in a way one might describe a trusted colleague and friend: a competent leader and all-around good guy, not a discredited underling leaving under a cloud of accusations of abusive behavior toward women — a cloud with a $225,000 settlement now attached.
A glowing review
Sidhu issues a sweeping testimonial to Hutchings’ skills: seven and a half years of solid service running the county’s physical infrastructure. A reliable, able hand during COVID-19 and other crises such as local epic floods. “Competent” management of 175 full-time workers. Successful wrangling of budgets ranging from $50 million to $80 million in public funds.
It goes on for a full page, single spaced. Not just about work history. A hint of vision. Sidhu called attention to Hutchings’ work “to advance meaningful changes within our County organization.”
“Jon envisioned the Public Works Department positioned to successfully deliver services twenty years in the future and engaged his employees to identify, prioritize and address barriers to achieving that success,” the executive gushed.
Beyond the complimentary tone of the letter itself, the “barriers” reference is likely to draw the eye of many, particularly women.
In a splash of irony, it might prove true that Hutchings’ legacy includes “meaningful changes” in the county’s administration.
Unfortunately, those changes are likely to center on policies, procedures and principles of dealing with sexual harassment. Not the sort of legacy you shout out on LinkedIn.
A missed chance
When the Hutchings mess went public on Monday — kudos to Crosscut/Cascade PBS for breaking and sharing the story — Sidhu still had a reasonable chance to own up to an obvious political gaffe. He could’ve copped a plea to felony nicety, saying grandfatherly compassion swelled up in him to cloud his judgment. Maybe that he was in a temporary coma. Something.
Instead, he doubled down. In a clumsy attempt to explain the letter to county council on Tuesday, Sidhu called the decision “difficult,” then wrote:
“Ultimately, we do not believe that a person is solely defined by their mistakes, and Mr. Hutchings had faced the very real consequence of losing his job.”
Leaving the question of a life “solely defined” to the gods, and acknowledging that the ultimate jury, the public at large, is still out, it’s already safe to label this a colossal political blunder.
This is especially so if it is deemed to open, as many will surely suspect, a window into the soul of yet another male in public life who takes most of the right actions in addressing sexual harassment, but still doesn’t seem to quite get it.
Sidhu, a Democrat recently reelected to the (wink-wink) “nonpartisan” post as the county’s top administrator, is a political moderate. A former county council member and legislative candidate, he is relatively experienced, but not a career politician.
That’s been held up as more of a political feature than bug by some observers, including this one, who have found Sidhu’s outside-the-lines thinking on some public issues to be refreshing; they seem more a product of curiosity and free thought than hidebound tradition resting in rotting piles of old party platform statements.
But the political greenness — or perhaps just disturbing, self-destructive bullheadedness — shows here.
Failing the final
The county exec deserves passing grades on tests one through three in this precarious matter: eventually acknowledging the problem, getting the offender out the door and addressing needed changes. And on Thursday he opened the door to a possible inquiry over the handling of the matter. But he failed the final by stopping just short of chauffeuring the suspect person down the road to some other hapless public employer. Which turned out to be the City of Lynden.
Given all this, you really do want to think The Letter was an off-moment, one in which Sidhu blew off what surely must have been cautionary words from political advisers savvy enough to smell the stench of political peril.
People hoping to justify their recent votes to reelect Sidhu might even be wishing The Letter was a hostage-video scenario, a necessity, because the Hutchings fallout had revealed gaps in the county’s policies so broad that they had to cough up an ode to a good man’s effectiveness as part of some settlement agreement to get him quietly out the door.
Nope.
Look at the documents. The separation agreement between the county and Hutchings required only what one might expect when future employers came calling, as Lynden did last spring: Dates of employment and salary. Good luck and God bless!
Instead, the letter from Sidhu and Schroeder signs off with this: “It’s been a pleasure working with Jon and I am very confident that he will serve your organization well.”
Sidhu, for reasons that he should have explained — and now must — went not just one step farther, but a baker’s dozen.
And then defended it, telling council members — and the rest of us, this about his glowing recommendation: “We understand that not everyone will agree with our decision.”
A call to dismiss — too soon?
No question there. Less than 48 hours later, the leadership board of Whatcom Democrats was calling for Sidhu’s political head on a pike.
The proclamation from that group, headed by savvy, irascible left-wing agitator Andrew Reding, whose preferred pot-stirring implement is more shovel than spoon, was not entirely unexpected. And as in past cases, time will tell whether the larger body politic of blue-bleeding constituents will be more forgiving.
Or not. Democrats, especially here, have a taste for eating their own.
And there’s a lot of noise in the kitchen.
From this mess, the county is left with: a wounded if not earthbound executive, an angry council — and a public rightfully bug-eyed about what appears to be an off-the-books, county-prosecutor-administered slush fund to settle tort claims against county officials and servants, with what amounts to a quarter-million dollar annual deductible.
And let’s not forget that small bucolic town up north now staring at a large, unpleasant object floating in its own Public Works punchbowl.
This fire is zero percent contained. And the public is left to ponder: Is a person in public life, as Sidhu himself asks, “solely defined” by serious blundering? He may not be prepared for that answer.
Ron Judd's column appears weekly; ronjudd@cascadiadaily.com; @roncjudd.
Party chair: We must hold all leaders — including Democrats — accountable